Tesla / Google Partnership, Coming Soon?

[luvb2b]

so google is sitting on a huge & growing pile of cash looking for something to do with it. i imagine one of these days they will partner and/or set up a joint venture with tesla to develop driverless teslas. a tesla seems to be the most logical vehicle choice for the google technology as the whole car is computerized anyway.

a few data points i'm seeing point to a tesla/google partnership coming in the not too distant future.

i figure it's worth sharing/starting a thread so others can post their thoughts and observations on what would be a killer app in automotive engineering:

1. here's a usa today interview - watch the part where elon talks about the future of cars. driverless is the first thing he mentions.

2. tmc user sffrog reports of tesla & google working together:
http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/show...servations-from-the-Menlo-Park-service-center
"- interestingly, a couple of cars were being prepped to be Google self-driving cars (which until now I have seen to be Lexus SUV hybrids). I would not be surprised if Tesla and Google were collaborating at several levels; no proof, just an interesting data point."

3. motor trend interview with elon musk, where he talks about his "friends" brin & page.
"I do think it will be interesting to do self-driving cars, perhaps working in conjunction with Google, who's quite close to us in Silicon Valley. Larry Page and Sergey Brin are longtime friends of mine, so it would be great to work with them, maybe to do self-driving [cars]."


4. google is already helping fund musk's other company of interest, solarcity.
http://www.solarcity.com/pressrelea...Solar-Projects--Nation’s-Largest-to-Date.aspx

 

[djplong]

One other reason the Tesla makes sense is that, with no engine or drivetrain or gas tank or any of those other parts an ICE/hybrid needs, you have *room* to put in the hardware that Google would provide *out of sight*, except for some of the sensors.

 

[AnOutsider]

No proof here, but another reason it might make sense: smarter cruise control for increased range. Granted a self-driving car would likely improve the efficiency of ANY car, but likely more effective in an EV (and the computer doesn't have to fiddle with hitting the right gear and such in a Model S)

 

[CapitalistOppressor]

Also interesting that Tesla hasn't implemented lane departure warning or other, similar features. There are several possible reasons, the most likely being that it is difficult and expensive to develop the technology and its not required by the safety regulations.

But if Tesla was going to partner with Google Driverless, the basic sensor kit and software for those features could be installed and a crippled version with basic features like lane departure and accident avoidance could be standard equipment, while the full driverless suite would be a paid option. If that's your 5 year plan it doesn't make a lot of sense to spend millions developing an inferior product that you plan on replacing.

 

[aronth5]

From Computerworld

Could the Tesla Model S become the Google Car?

http://blogs.computerworld.com/could_the_tesla_model_s_become_the_google_car

 

[Cattledog]

'Right under our noses'...

 

[kcveins]

From Computerworld

Could the Tesla Model S become the Google Car?

http://blogs.computerworld.com/could_the_tesla_model_s_become_the_google_car

Unless I am missing something, this was posted in 2009....

 

[Soflason]

'Right under our noses'...

+1

This could be it potentially, definitely a real possibility that a Google/Tesla announcement is forthcoming.

 

[Yelmurc]

Elon also mentioned self driving cars at last years annual shareholder meeting if memory serves me right.

 

[MikeC]

Why would I let a computer drive my Model S? I'm looking for excuses to drive it more!

 

[Cattledog]

MikeC - Agree!

I can see this playing out...

Me: Disable AutoDrive

Model S: No

Me: Disable AutoDrive!!!

Model S: No, I'm enjoying it too much. (Nose cone ever so slightly grins)

Model S then automatically enables driver auto eject, pano roof opens, projectile hurtles into the night.

 

[gjunky]

Or


Me: Go Park
Model S: Self Park engaged
Model S: I'll be back


The car should be painted a liquid silver color of course

 

[trils0n]

I noticed today my maps on the center console said Navigation by Tesla and Google. Don't remember seeing that before.

 

[huntjo]

It's said by Tesla and Google since November

 

[CapitalistOppressor]

Another factor to consider is that its becoming more and more apparent that the traditional car companies don't want any part of what Google is offering, and are developing their own driverless systems. Volvo, BMW, Mercedes and Lexus are all talking about deploying human in the loop systems which operate below 25mph in the next year or two. Every other major company seems to have such systems in advanced development.

My sense is that there might well be no major car maker on the planet willing to even partner with Google. They have invested billions in this technology over the course of decades, are achieving real successes, and appear to be wary of abandoning that effort and putting themselves at the mercy of Google.

Tesla wont have any compunctions about becoming a part of the Google ecosystem. They can't afford to develop their own system in any reasonable time frame, and are based just down the street from Google. Whose founders also are major investors and friends with Elon Musk.

Maybe the question shouldn't be whether Tesla and Google will partner on this, but rather who besides Tesla even appears interested?

 

[Cattledog]

Pretty sure Google has way more cash and tech resources to develop this than GM or Ford (unless you count the full faith and credit of the US Department of Treasury being at their disposal). I think the general public would trust a Google system more than Lincoln's or Cadillac's , for example. This is absolutely the right space to be in for Tesla.

 

[Zzzz...]

One of the problem with driverless cars is that AI systems are not good enough for real time use.

Think about speech recognition. It is improved dramatically in recent years(if you got Android 4.2+ with Google Experience or latest phone with Microsoft OS in it you could actually try current state of art)***. But it still doing worse then average human in picking up of what you just have said. Until your phone would start doing better job in understanding what have you said, better then average guy your are talking over the phone, driverless cars would not be a reality.

Problem is as of now software is not good at recognizing things. Is it multicolored plastic bag that wind blown onto the road? Or child trying to cross it, running? Is that a pedestrian that talks on the phone emotionally and moving toward side road crosswalk, do not paying attention to surroundings and about to start crossing it despite "no crossing" red light for him? Or it is a normal guy who clearly noticed that you are approaching and about to make right turn and that it is a red light for him?

There are gazillion situations, animals trying to cross the road, boxes falling out of track in front of you, collision right ahead unfolding, stop lights not working/broken in car in front of you, traffic at the busy intersection regulated by some fat strange looking pedestrian volunteer who have zero clue how to regulate it (saw this one with my own eyes during Northeast blackout of 2003 ).

I'm afraid, until AGI become a reality, all "driverless" will have a operator sitting in them ready to take control... And such operator renders this tech pointless...

But one thing I'm looking forward to, is getting rid of the most popular collision - rear ending one... Technology is already here, but laws and potential liabilities do prevent current cars from actually stepping up the breaks when there an obstacle ahead.

*** Nuance, speech recognition tech used by Apple iPhone and Samsung Galaxy still lagging behind MSFT and GOOG.

 

[Rodolfo Paiz]

One of the problem with driverless cars is that AI systems are not good enough for real time use.

Not good enough for driverless cars, no. But I think Google's self-driving cars are over 300,000 miles with only one accident so far, and that was operator-caused to boot. So the technology is ready today to make driving safer for many people, though they'd still be required to sit in the driver's seat and monitor. It's not Utopia, but it's still an amazing feat of engineering IMHO. And it's only going to get better.

 

[BondVillain]

This was a topic of discussion at the latest SAE convention. Article about it in the WSJ: http://blogs.wsj.com/corporate-inte...ng-soon-self-driving-cars-mainstream-by-2025/

Self-driving cars are obviously the next big leap forward for the automobile. The first thing that comes to my mind is sending the car on errands (in store pick-up for instance) when you're too busy to do them. Of course, they would have to figure out how to stop theft and vandalism haha. Maybe even swivel seats to interact with your passengers if they can make that safe to do.

 

[riceuguy]

Not good enough for driverless cars, no. But I think Google's self-driving cars are over 300,000 miles with only one accident so far, and that was operator-caused to boot. So the technology is ready today to make driving safer for many people, though they'd still be required to sit in the driver's seat and monitor. It's not Utopia, but it's still an amazing feat of engineering IMHO. And it's only going to get better.

It's actually up over 500,000 miles now; the cost is still the primary issue, as the Google cars utilize an extra $50-$100k worth of equipment to make them work!